A major institutional shareholder and a conservative think tank filed suit against The New York Times in New York County Supreme Court on Wednesday, demanding access to internal corporate records to determine whether the paper’s newsroom standards are being followed or whether coverage has tilted against Israel, according to a report by The Free Press.
The State Board of Administration of Florida, which manages public pension money, joined the National Center for Public Policy Research in bringing the action after what they describe as four months of the Times refusing to respond to their requests. The plaintiffs are represented in part by the National Jewish Advocacy Center.
At issue is a legal mechanism that allows shareholders to inspect corporate books and records — in this case, board agendas, committee charters, and newsroom rules. According to the suit, the Times dismissed the shareholders’ demands as “pretextual” and argued that opening its internal records would “chill” protected journalism. Even after the shareholders narrowed their request to basic governance documents, the paper reportedly continued to refuse.
Corporate Filings Cited as Evidence
The plaintiffs point to the Times’ own filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which state that the company’s credibility is its most important business asset and warn that a public perception of biased reporting could harm its financial performance.
“Shareholders are entitled to see whether the board was watching at all,” David Benger, an attorney representing the National Jewish Advocacy Center, said in a statement.
The lawsuit includes testimony from a former Jewish employee who worked nearly a decade on the Times’ video desk before leaving in March 2026. According to court papers, she raised concerns about anti-Israel bias with managers, human resources, and ethics tip lines at least 15 times and was ignored.
The former employee alleges that after Hamas’ October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, video staff sought ways to disprove that Hamas was using tunnels beneath al-Shifa Hospital. One supervisor continued to refer to them as “alleged tunnels” even after Israel released footage of the underground network, according to the filing.
The suit also details the case of Soliman Hijjy, a freelance video journalist whom the Times stopped using in 2022 after social media posts praising Hitler came to light. The Times rehired him within days of the October 7 attack, and his byline was only removed after an outside watchdog identified it, according to the filing, though he continued contributing.
The former employee said Human Resources suggested she find a job “whose values aligned” with hers, while her supervisor told her that investigating such problems was not her responsibility.
A Viral Photo and an Editor’s Note
The lawsuit also cites a July 2025 photo published by the Times showing an emaciated Gazan toddler, Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq, with a caption stating his mother reported he was “born healthy.” Four days later, the paper issued an editor’s note acknowledging the boy had severe pre-existing genetic conditions. According to the suit, wire photos had explicitly detailed his congenital illnesses, but Times standards editors greenlit the framing anyway.
Study Cited in Suit
The complaint references a September study by Edieal Pinker of the Yale School of Management, published in the journal “Studies in Conflict and Terrorism.” Pinker and his team analyzed 1,559 Times news reports published between October 7, 2023, and June 7, 2024.
According to the study, nearly 70% of the 969 relevant articles framed Israel as the exclusive bad actor. Fewer than half mentioned the Israeli hostages held in Gaza. Although 364 Israeli Defense Forces soldiers and 31 Israeli civilians died during the period studied, 89% of ground-coverage articles never mentioned Israeli military casualties after October 7, meaning readers went weeks without seeing a single mention of fallen soldiers.
Personal stories of Palestinian suffering appeared roughly every two out of three days, while coverage of Israeli hardship after October 7 appeared in under 4% of ground reports. The word “Israel” appeared 27,205 times across the study, compared with 8,499 mentions of “Hamas.” Only 18% of reports mentioned ongoing Palestinian violence, and just 10% noted Hamas fighter casualties.
The Times has not commented on the lawsuit. In 2025, after Pinker released his findings, the paper told media outlets that it had covered the conflict with “more rigor” than virtually anyone else and rejected claims of institutional bias.
The case now goes before a judge, who will decide whether the Times must turn over internal records to its own shareholders.
Source: www.dailywire.com — https://www.dailywire.com/news/top-investors-sue-new-york-times-over-anti-israel-bias